History Repeats Itself In Afghanistan and Pakistan

Reports on Friday and Saturday indicated that the Taliban is using civilians as human shields. This article seems to imply that this is a surprise. I fail to understand why it should be. This has been a tactic of intimidation used by every terrorist guerilla warfare group, at least in recent history--Hamas, the Taliban, all the way to Vietnam, Moa, Che Guevara, and even farther back in time. Unfortunately, the frightening part of the article is the last paragraph:

On Friday Karzai said "we cannot justify in any manner, for whatever number of Taliban, for whatever number of significantly important terrorists, the accidental or otherwise loss of civilians."

Like it or not, civilian suffering is a part of standing against evil. The Taliban, or whatever extremist group you care to name, will always use that suffering to get their opponents to stop fighting for fear of hurting innocent someone. They will try to plaster the media with how ugly the destruction is that gets “imposed by the good guys.” We must remember one very important thing. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE SUFFERINGS OF OTHERS. And, extremeists will never be stopped if we put suffering or some other difficulty ahead of defeating those extremist groups. Taking President Karzai’s statement at face value would indicate he has already given up the will to fight. For the sake of our soldiers, and those of supporting nations, I hope not. If that occurs, Afghanistan will become another Vietnam for someone.


But, then again, given Thursday’s announcement that US troops won’t go to Pakistan just brought flashbacks of Vietnam to me. Any student of history knows that a big reason North Vietnam overcame the South was the ability to hide and build forces in Laos and Cambodia. The communist forces successfully controlled those other countries, and then used them as bases. With the take over of the Swat area and areas closer to Islamabad by militant forces, coupled with the inability of the Pakistani Army to turn back the tide (some reports indicate they are being complicit in the takeover), this is looking more and more like Vietnam. Contrary to popular media reports, Bush did indeed set us on the road to get out of Iraq. His timetable has become the same timetable that President Obama is using. The question now becomes: will Obama be able to get us out of Afghanistan without the disgrace we suffered in Vietnam?

Is It Islam...or Money?

MSNBC has made another massive gaff. Friday, the “news source” once again demonstrated it lack of understanding of things Islamic by saying that capitalism not religion defines roles for women in that culture.

O'Donnell then turned to Sally Quinn of the Washington Post, who wrote about the theory on the newspaper's On Faith blog: "This is a hot topic, Sally. Do you believe that oil is behind sexism in the Middle East?" Quinn replied: "Well, I do think that it has a lot to do with it...when you have an oil-rich country, there's much less manufacturing, so that there are fewer jobs for women. But also because the country is so rich that women don't need to work and therefore they're comfortable and they stay home."

How anyone can say that is a mystery to me. The role of women has not changed, per se, in traditional Islamic cultures for hundreds of years. The roles were defined before the oil wealth existed there, and they permeate the culture from the bottom to the top. These kinds of determinations are just perfect examples of Liberalism trying to make things what they appear, not what they really are. And, unfortunately, people believe them rather than question them.

On the subject of things Islamic, the US is reportedly planning to send $900 million in aid to Gaza.

The aid would go to nongovernmental and UN organisations, with some going to the Palestinian Authority, the official said.

Given the UN track record of keeping tabs on and controlling Hamas activities—such as those recently missing explosives--I am not holding my breath over any aid not going to the terrorists.

The Middle East And Middle America

How can anyone believe that the Arab world really wants a peaceful settlement in the Middle East? The Turish Prime Minister walked out (stormed was the word used by the BBC) of meetings in Davos over the Gaza situation. Then, in a meeting in Instanbul, Sunni sheiks and scholars called for a new jihad.

Mohammed Nazzal, a senior Hamas leader based in Damascus, challenged Arab governments to "open their borders and allow the fighters to come."

Delegates from all over the Middle East, and from Somalia, Sudan, Pakistan and Indonesia applauded as he stabbed the air with a raised finger and declared: "There will be no agreement with Israel... only weapons will bring respect."

Mr Nazzal told his audience: "Don't worry about casualties."

The Arabs do not want, and have never really wanted, peace with Israel. Consider, for example, missing explosives, under Hamas guard, waiting UN disposal that are now missing. Does it really surprise anyone that Israel is blaming Hamas for sneaking the weapons off. And, in normal anti-Israel media fashion, no one seems to be commenting on Hamas’ silence over the situation. And, then, there was John Kerry’s comment about the peace process. Speaking about relations with Syria Rueters reports:

On the possibility of improved relations with Israel following recent elections there, he said: "Betting on the Israeli government is a waste of time."

(…nope…no bias in this administration…)

Meanwhile, at home, the Obama Administration is figuring out how to limit executive compensation. A Reuters news report said something stunning:

Many analysts say the government's activities in pumping massive amounts of capital into banks and setting rules for executive pay for those receiving funds represents the greatest intrusion of government into the private sector in decades.

Is there really any question on this issue? The government is nationalizing banks, and perhaps other industries. It is deciding what employees (executive or otherwise) can and cannot be paid. And, nothing of this scope has been done in America since the 1930s. The Stimulus Plan does not “represent” the biggest move of government into the private sector. It IS the biggest such move in America. And, it certainly is not what America’s founding fathers had in mind when they strove to create limited government and maximum personal freedom.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson

(...you might also want to go read The Mind of the Obama Follower does not understand that Tax and Wage Increases on Business Hurts The Middle Class...well worth it...)